---

Sueing the AMA

---

Summary

The American Medical Association should be sued. A successful lawsuit would improve medical practice considerably, and it could even reduce malpractice costs.
400 words

by Eric Armstrong

The American Medical Association should be sued. A successful lawsuit would improve medical practice considerably, and it could even reduce malpractice costs.

Take poison ivy, for example. I recently found out from a friend that doctors are still prescribing industrial-strength cortico-steroids to "cure" poison oak and poison ivy, even though there is a simple soap that is 100% effective, with no health risk whatever. (For more information on that topic, see Curing Poison Oak and Poison Ivy.)

What's criminal here is that this information has been known for more than 20 years. Yet doctors are still prescribing drugs with potentally harmful side-effects for a condition that doesn't require any. (For instance,  topical steroids thin the skin, which can produce rosacea--a condition in which new skin cells rise to the surface too fast, so they appear red and blotchy instead of aging normally to produce the nice skin tones we expect.)

It's unlikely that one could sue a doctor for this problem. After all, they're doing what they were trained to do in medical school. Of course, the medical school they attended was funded in large part by drug companies--and they're not even remotely interested in remedies that don't require drugs--so the good doctor can hardly be blamed for his or her egregious ignorance.

The American Medical Association is another matter, however. They can and should be educating their members about such extremely simple, extremely effective remedies. Unless the American Medical Association can demonstrate that they did indeed inform the doctor, it is the American Medical Association that should be held liable.

One good lawsuit. That's all it would take. The result would be an occassional bulletin that told doctors how to avoid drugs and how to treat simple ailments like poison ivy and poison oak effectively. The doctors would read those bulletins, too. After all, failing to do so would make them liable, once again.

Malpractice costs would drop as a result of sending those bulletins, because doctors would be better educated. Malpractice costs would also drop because "the AMA never told me" would turn into a practical defense. Of course, AMA membership fees would likely rise. But that fee increase would fund the ongoing education that should be part of every doctor's training.

About Eric Armstrong

Eric Armstrong is computer systems designer, writer, and philosopher. He is currently working on a book that uses the principles of General Systems Theory to explain how America's epidemic of obesity and disease stems from profitable, but unhealthy, ingredients in the food supply; how the corporate financial system (and our own retirement plans) are complicit in the problem; how the American political system allows it to happen; and how our problems with the environment, a dwindling standard of living, and even our problems with the global economy all stem from the same constellation of systemic interactions. At www.treelight.com/health, he focuses on nutrition and fitness. At www.citizensAdvisory.org, his forming non-profit is working to get the money out of politics. At www.artima.com/weblogs, he writes about software, web technology, and development tools.

About Citizens' Advisory

Corporate money has hijacked the ballot box. The Citizens' Advisory aims to take it back. Our goal is to put people in charge of the political process. The voting-advice system recommended by the Citizens Advisory lets people choose advisors they trust. Done right, that system will enable multi-party coalitions in cyberspace. The system appeals to voters because it's convenient. It appeals to social activists and their organizations because it levels the political playing the field and empowers them with a stronger political voice.

Copyright © 2005 byCitizens' Advisory.
All rights reserved.